Tan Chuan-Jin
Singapore
“A step-parent who wishes to leave any part of his or her estate to a stepchild is encouraged to make a will. Intestacy law would apply in cases where a person passes on without a will.”
“Last year, we reviewed and extended the Child Development Account, or CDA benefits to children of unwed parents. The Government granted CDA benefits, to children of unwed parents born, or with an estimated date of delivery, from 1 September 2016. It is generally good practice to implement our policies prospectively.”
“The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) does not track the number of persons who choose to remain homeless instead of being admitted into shelters. When MSF receives information on persons who may be homeless, we initiate contact with these persons on the ground to offer assistance.”
“Our law places the child's welfare and interests at the heart of an adoption decision. We must not forget that such an adoption is a life-changing event because when an unwed mother adopts her child, the duties, obligations and liabilities of the biological father are terminated.”
“The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) works closely with the Housing and Development Board (HDB) to plan for preschools in upcoming Build-To-Order (BTO) developments, including Bidadari new town. To better meet the needs of young parents, new preschools will have larger capacities and also be completed earlier where possible.”
“The Silver Support Scheme under the Manpower Ministry provides an income supplement to seniors who had low incomes through life and who now have little or no family support. Beyond ComCare, we are also expanding upstream intervention to strengthen the resilience of vulnerable families and their children to set a good foundation.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,137 lines we hold for Tan Chuan-Jin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 19 of 23.
“MOM does not define and categorise jobs by whether they are physically demanding or not, nor find it practical to do so. The nature of jobs varies across industries and companies, even for jobs with the same title. In June 2012, 45% of resident workers aged 60 and over worked in the category of Production and Transport Operators, Cleaners and Labourers or related occupations, which, generally, tend to consist of jobs that may be comparatively more physically demanding. This is due, in part, to the lower educational profile of our older workers. The type of jobs suitable for workers depends on many factors, such as the worker's skill sets, physical abilities and preferences. While we do not actively re-deploy older workers into any particular jobs or industries, we tailor the job placement assistance that we provide to meet each job seeker's circumstances and needs. For instance, WDA's Career Centres are sensitive to the needs and requirements of each individual, including senior citizens. Our Career Consultants adopt a case-management approach to help each client based on his individual capabilities, circumstances, physical abilities and job preferences. We also provide information to workers and job seekers to help them make more informed job choices. In addition, we help those who wish to change jobs do so, by referring them to other jobs and helping them acquire the relevant skills. Given our ageing population, the proportion of older workers will increase across all industries over time. Therefore, more importantly, we need to prepare employers and workers for this demographic shift in our workforce. Employers need to redesign their jobs and work processes to better match the capabilities and needs of older workers.”
“The Tripartite Alliance on Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP) was set up in 2006 as a promotional body. Leveraging on its unique tripartite identity, TAFEP works in partnership with employer organisations, unions and the Government to create awareness and facilitate the adoption of fair, responsible and merit-based employment practices. TAFEP has made good progress – employers are today more aware of what it means to have fair employment practices, and the number of employers who have signed the Employer's Pledge of Fair Employment has more than trebled, from about 600 in 2007 to more than 2,000 in 2012. Any employee who feels that he/she has been discriminated against at the workplace can today already contact TAFEP for advice. This consultation is free and TAFEP will follow up to contact the employer where there is a possible case of discrimination. Most employers whom TAFEP had engaged in the past on such complaints were cooperative and took active steps to rectify their discriminatory practices. In some instances, TAFEP may also suggest relevant training for the employers to assist them in adopting fair employment practices. At MOM's Committee of Supply debate earlier this year, my Minister also addressed Members on the issue of fair employment. He had said then that the Government expects all employers doing business in Singapore to comply with the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices. While TAFEP as a promotional body does not have the powers to enforce these practices, MOM will step in and investigate complaints surfaced by TAFEP where prima facie evidence suggests that there are discriminatory hiring practices at play. Employers who run afoul of the guidelines may have their foreign manpower work pass privileges curtailed.”
“The Government already has schemes in place to help SMEs tap on part-time workers today. For example, SPRING has implemented a part-time pool programme for the Retail and Food Services sectors, which encourages SMEs to adopt flexible staffing models and integrate part-timers into their workforce. Under the programme, appointed service providers recruit and deploy a pool of trained part-timers for companies to tap on. This pool includes students and previously economically inactive mature workers. The industry associations, namely the Singapore Retailers Association (SRA) and the Restaurant Association of Singapore (RAS), train the part-timers with WSQ accredited training. To date, more than 120 companies and more than 3,000 part-timers have joined the programme. The hotels sector has a similar part-time pool programme, driven by the Singapore Hotels Association (SHA). We would encourage industry associations to play an active role in developing such part-time pool initiatives if their sectors have similar needs for part-time workers. Besides part-time work, companies can also offer many other forms of flexible work arrangements to tap on those who seek more flexibility. We are aware that some employers, especially SMEs, face challenges in implementing flexible work arrangements. Hence, we launched WorkPro this year to help employers put in place flexible work arrangements, and tap on local mature workers and those who wish to return to the workforce. The Work-Life Grant under WorkPro provides funding support of up to $160,000 per company for the implementation of work-life strategies, particularly flexible work arrangements, to help employers attract and retain employees. SMEs are expected to form 70% of the companies that will benefit from WorkPro.”
“Those who require employment and training assistance can approach WDA's CaliberLink or Career Centres at the Community Development Councils (CDCs). The number of EP holders has already fallen last year due to more stringent policies – the first time since 2003 that it experienced a decline. As announced at the Committee of Supply debate this year, MOM is further reviewing the eligibility requirements for EP holders. In consultation with tripartite stakeholders, we will also work towards a sustainable framework to ensure that firms give Singaporeans fair consideration in employment.”
“The overall incidence of redundancy in Singapore has remained low at 5.8 per 1,000 workers in 2012. This is comparable to the past two years1 and below the longer-term trend. Amongst PMETs, it has increased from 5.5 per 1,000 workers in 2011 to 7.4 per 1,000 workers in 2012. This is still low, and comparable to the historical trend. This increase was partly due to above-average incidence of redundancy for PMETs in electronics (at 21 per 1,000), financial services (14 per 1,000) and information & communications (13 per 1,000) – industries which typically hire more PMETs. These are also industries that are externally oriented and hence more affected by the current global economic slowdown. As our economic restructuring picks up pace, we could see redundancy increase for both PMETs and non-PMETs as an outcome of workers moving across jobs and industries. What is important is to keep structural unemployment low and help workers who are affected to find new employment. Even though the incidence of redundancy was higher among PMETs than non-PMETs in 2012, unemployment amongst resident PMETs remained low. The annual average unemployment rate for those with a degree stands at 2.7%, which is comparable to the overall unemployment rate of 2.8%. This is lower2 than the overall unemployment rates in comparable economies such as Hong Kong (3.3%) and South Korea (3.2%). There is likewise no significant difference between the long-term unemployment rate of those with degrees and those without3. At the same time, there are still many jobs available for PMETs. In 2012, more than 20,000 job vacancies4 were available for PMETs. Nonetheless, we will ensure there is adequate help for workers who are displaced to pick up new skills and find suitable new jobs.”
“Employers who still face difficulties in paying medical bills beyond the insured amount may approach the relevant healthcare provider to discuss various options, such as instalment payments. We encourage employers to avail themselves of higher insurance coverage, beyond the minimum requirement, if they wish to have greater protection and peace of mind.”
“The Government does not give any healthcare subsidies to foreigners, including foreign domestic workers (FDWs). When employers bring in FDWs, we must ensure that any medical bills incurred by the FDW do not remain unpaid and get passed on to taxpayers. This would be unfair to society at large. Therefore, MOM requires all employers of FDWs and non-domestic Work Permit Holders to bear the full costs of employing these workers, including bearing the cost of their medical treatment. Employers must comply with this condition when they apply for work passes. In order to help employers meet the financial burden of bearing the medical costs of their foreign workers, including FDWs, mandatory employer-financed medical insurance for day surgery and inpatient expenses was introduced in 2008, for each Work Permit and S Pass holder employed. The minimum medical insurance coverage was set at a basic level in order to keep premiums affordable for the vast majority of employers. Employers who wish to be covered for higher medical bills are free to purchase insurance coverage beyond the mandatory minimum. We regularly review whether the minimum medical insurance coverage is adequate. In 2010, in response to feedback from employers, we raised the minimum insurance requirement from $5,000 to $15,000. The $15,000 minimum insurance requirement covered an average of 98% of FDW medical bills from 2010 to 2012, and continues to provide a reasonable level of protection for employers at affordable premiums. The incidence of FDWs requiring hospitalisation care remains low. On average, less than 1% of FDWs were hospitalised at our public healthcare institutions over the last three years.”
“Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Member for the supplementary questions. All full-time subsidised undergraduate courses leading to a degree at our key educational establishments are covered under the CPF Education Scheme. The intent is, indeed, to support our young people as far as we can. However, we do need to remember the core purpose of CPF which is why we have decided to open up the space slightly but I think we do to manage that space. Notwithstanding the assurance from children that they are able to repay their parents and so on, we do also have instances where there are issues arising from that. So, what I would say is that we do have many schemes available to support students who will need to pursue their various dreams and aspirations at the various institutions. For those that are not publicly funded, there are also various bursaries available as well.”
“My Ministry monitors the labour force participation rate (LFPR), which is defined as the proportion of the working-age population who are economically active. Over the past five years, LFPR of residents aged 55 to 64 increased from 58.6% in 2007 to a new high of 66% in 2012. The pattern was similar for both males and females. They increased from 77.4% to 82.3%; and 39.9% to 49.7% over the period respectively. The vast majority of our economically-active residents aged 55 to 64 were employed, as the unemployment rate for residents in this age group was only 2.4%, compared with the overall rate of 2.8% in 2012. In fact, Singapore has one of the highest LFPR for older males, ahead of Hong Kong, Taiwan and many OECD countries. But we are behind Japan and Sweden. Our LFPR among older females still lags behind many developed countries, such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Japan and South Korea, though we compared favourably with Hong Kong and Taiwan. Page: 159”
“When a member turns age 55, his savings in the CPF Ordinary Account (OA) and Special Account (SA) will be used to set aside the Minimum Sum (MS) in his Retirement Account. Members are free to withdraw amounts in excess of the MS. As at December 2012, about 18% of the cohort who turned age 55 in 2012 had balances above the MS that were not withdrawn. We have observed that members with balances above the MS generally keep these monies in the CPF for the longer term. These monies could have been retained in the CPF by members who find CPF interest rates attractive.”
“We are heartened that there is a rising trend of employers offering flexible work arrangements to their Page: 138 employees. In 2012, 41% of establishments offered at least one form of work-life arrangement to their employees, up from 25% in 20073.”
“The Government has put in place a range of initiatives to promote flexible work arrangements and to help individuals return to the workforce. This includes WorkPro that was launched this month as a one-stop programme to encourage employers to build progressive workplaces through funding assistance for flexible work arrangements and to recruit back-to-work individuals, including mothers, by supporting job redesign and on-the-job training. In particular, the Work-Life Grant under WorkPro provides funding of up to $160,000 per employer to encourage the implementation and support of the use of flexible work arrangements by their employees. Employers who hire and retain back-to-work individuals can also receive On-the-Job Training Allowances and New Hire Retention Incentives of up to $4,000 per worker. This encourages employers to put in more effort to hire and retain back-to-work individuals, including by equipping them with the right skills on the job. We also work with various agencies, including the Employer Alliance, to promote positive mindsets and build capability to offer flexible work arrangements at the workplace through forums, tool kits and case studies. Through these measures, we hope that more employers will redesign their workplaces and offer more flexible jobs to attract those who wish to return to the workforce. We will continue to work closely with our tripartite partners to facilitate the gainful employment of back-to-work individuals on flexible work arrangements or otherwise. While we do not track statistics on the number of job vacancies that offer flexible working hours, we do monitor the proportion of establishments that offer flexible working arrangements as an indication of how commonly available such options are.”
“When we look at the different sectors that are affected in the economy, older Singaporeans are certainly one area that we are concerned about. Perhaps, to put it in context, I mentioned earlier that unemployment levels for PMEs at all ages are lower than their counterparts, the non-PMEs. But having said that, when you look at age, older Singaporeans do tend to have slightly higher unemployment than their younger counterparts. Between the PMEs and non-PMEs, one of the trends that you are finding – perhaps, it is too early to establish it as a trend but I suspect that is likely to be the case – and, as highlighted by Ms Low, is that for older PMEs who lose their jobs, their ability to get back into employment is rather difficult and it is a function of age, it is a function of skills and various factors. Certainly, CalibreLink and e2i are looking at working with Singaporeans of all ages. But it is something that Ms Low has been actively advocating, and I would look at that seriously because I think there are probably peculiar dynamics involved in that and it is one area that we really should see how to help not just older PMEs, but really all Singaporeans. And where there are enough grounds for us to have distinctive approaches and it warrants a set-up, I think that is something that we could well entertain. Page: 173”
“The short answer is "yes", but probably there will be lead agencies, not so much MOM. In fact, we have lead agencies in MTI that look after the different sectors and they are essentially the champions working with the different companies, and that is where the close working relationship will take place in terms of working with them. In fact, that is already happening. MAS, for example, works extensively with the finance industry to make sure that there are very comprehensive programmes to groom local Singaporeans in these banks so that when they are able to move up, and when senior Page: 172 positions are available, they are there and ready for it to happen. We have seen that happening in some sectors and we hope to see this in other sectors, and certainly that is something that EDB is looking at in terms of working closely with all the various industries coming in. That should be, I think, a criterion or at least certainly an important consideration when we look at working with companies who are investing in Singapore.”
“I thank the Member for the question. It is a recurring request by every sector because every sector believes that it has slightly unique considerations and that these should be provided. It becomes a dilemma because if we accede to one or the other, you basically will unfold a lot of measures that are being put in place. But a very quick point is this: in terms of source, it is something that we will always relook at but there are various considerations. One is that, if you recruit from certain countries, you might even have a greater wage depressive effect because for some of these countries, because of where they are, the wage expectation might be lower and that actually would also have an impact. And in some of these countries, if we allow the sources to be opened and for the head space to be taken up, what it means is that you suddenly will have a surge of foreign manpower coming into those sectors and that actually might also undo some of the efforts to restructure as well. So, those are the dilemmas that we are trying to balance, but we do take the feedback, and it is something that we will continue to look at. We will look at the various sources but, at this point in time, the answer is a "no".”
“I thank Mr Yee for the question and the opportunity to clarify. When we are looking at the ESC's recommendations, I think we are looking at keeping to about a third where we can, and we are really looking at this decade. For the following decade, the dynamics are a bit different. So, for this decade, depending on how it unfolds, with the measures taking place, we would aim to hover at or around one-third if we can. I think we can probably manage to do that but it will be painful. But beyond that, of course, as you all know, by 2020, our own domestic labour force growth will basically end up at about zero. So, whatever growth we have thereafter will largely be foreign labour growth. What happens in the following decade? A lot depends on productivity. A lot depends on where we are in terms of restructuring efforts which is why this phase is particularly important. So, it is really about one-third for this decade until about 2020.”
“In terms of our focus on restructuring the economy − the emphasis on productivity and the emphasis that we are placing in terms of working with companies, particularly SMEs, and especially the smaller SMEs which do not have the resource and perhaps the bandwidth to really understand what is available out there − I would stay that this is something that the Government would put in the effort. I do not think it is just MOM; it is also MTI, and certainly a lot of the front-line agencies, as explained by colleagues during MTI's COS, on how we are actually setting up one-stop shops to advise and help particularly SMEs on how best to evolve the way they operate, and how do we tap on the resources available to assist them in their whole transition period. So, whether in terms of road shows, clinics or information being put out to everybody, we will explore all various means in order to reach out and help our companies transit. Page: 170”
“One of the insights that we gathered about certain sectors is that in terms of shift work – and these are for white collar jobs, PME jobs – Singaporeans are not necessarily very keen on some of these sectors, for example. Another insight that we received from another sector was when they talked about developing Singaporean talent, interestingly, Singaporeans were not so keen to be deployed overseas. They are shifting to sending Singaporeans when they are a little younger, perhaps before they have children and so on. As a result of that, that has had some impact on the way they assess the individuals in terms of their progression and movement. We will find that it may vary but where there are concerns, we will look into it, we will investigate and we will deal with the management or we will deal with the specific companies. It depends on the particular situation. But it is a fair concern.”
“I would like to thank the Member for his questions. With regard to the curtailing of Work Pass privileges, what we are looking at is for companies who are bringing in employees, whether on EP, S Pass or even at Work Permit level. This is a privilege that was provided for and there are certain criteria that need to be fulfilled. If we deem companies to be carrying out practices which we find not acceptable, we will suspend those privileges and we will have to decide whether to accede to them or not. That, essentially, is how we see ourselves applying it. In terms of the numbers, this is something we have started to apply. We are in the process of investigating the various companies. In the process of investigations, we will not approve of their Work Pass applications should there be any. A lot will depend on the particular case. There will be different levels of severity, different levels of cooperation by the companies concerned. We are also building up a database to understand the profile of the different companies; and, thereby, hopefully, we will be a lot sharper in the way we apply ourselves through that. This is something that is new and, this is something that will be part of the overall landscape. The main change that we started previously was frameworks. The EP framework worked fairly. Therefore, we are evolving that space. In terms of existing enclaves, this is something that we will take up on a case-by-case basis. One of the things we realise when we deal with different sectors, we have found there are sometimes reasons why particular enclaves may be formed. There may be sectors where not many Singaporeans who may be keen about. Some may argue that it might be the wage levels. For some, it Page: 169 is because of the work conditions.”
“We will look at all letters fairly. Certainly, we have criteria that we apply; and where we can accede, we will accede.”
“I would agree that education is important. Dealing with this issue squarely, putting it forward for us to talk about, to raise awareness amongst employers, is important. With regard to the Member's second question, perhaps, let us defer back to Senior Minister of State Ms Indranee Rajah.”
“The first question on skills certification for Work Pass renewals is something that I think we can look at. At the moment, we have looked at the progressive skills framework where we incentivise companies, particularly in the services sector, to look at keeping their workers for a longer period, and tied to that would be a certain salary level and upskilling. The second point is again something that we could consider, but not at the moment. Third one, in terms of dormitories, we are making sure that we will build as fast as we can, as many as we can, to make sure that accommodation can be provided for. That is something that we are looking at holistically, going forward. It is an area that we are mindful of. We understand the concerns in certain areas, and it is something that we will try to deal with. Asst Prof Tan Kheng Boon Eugene: I am very encouraged by the Minister's assurance on trying to stamp out discrimination. Education is also needed because there is a lot of ignorance about what amounts to discriminatory practices. I hope the Minister would also pay attention to taxpayer-funded institutions. That is where the sting of discrimination is felt even stronger. Much as I am encouraged by the Minister's response, I find it hard to square with the response given by the Senior Minister of State for Education Ms Indranee Rajah yesterday with regard to a level playing field in the University sector.”
“If I could request the Member to repeat the second question.”
“But if we realise this and we shine a torchlight on this front, and people start playing ball and being much more sensitive to this issue, this will go a very long way. 6.30 pm We will put in the effort to manage this. It will be a system approach. It is not just about dealing with it on its own but the entire framework. We believe this is a balance, and could be an effective way to deal with it. It will not solve every problem; there will still be individuals who feel frustrated. What we hope to do is to deal with it squarely so that Singaporeans do have a fair deal.”
“I thank Mr Zainudin for his clarification. I think it is a very relevant one. We have been looking at this issue of discrimination for some time. We also realise that discrimination – whether on nationality or other forms of discrimination – is one of those areas that we know it is difficult to prove. That is where managing expectations is something that is of concern. We cannot ignore this issue because it is something that exists. There are perceptions. There are concerns. We also realise that when we take in complaints, not just on this issue but on a range of issues, sometimes there will be personal differences. People might be passed over, they are disgruntled, they feel that it is because of discrimination rather than individual differences. We see a range of different issues. But there is enough evidence that some of it, and, at some level, there is genuine concern. The Member's concern about managing expectation I think is a real one. We do intend to follow up on the various complaints. We will look at it. We also build up a data bank to understand the various profiles of the company. We will look at the compositions within the companies and there will be sometimes patterns emerging with regard to particular companies. Obviously, that would suggest and may point to particular trends and whether some companies may seem to have a certain culture and that warrants us going in a bit deeper, and digging deeper to see whether there are such practices. Page: 164 I hope that that has a salutary effect on the companies. Addressing these issues squarely is helpful. Companies do need to pay attention to these things. What we have found is that some companies are not paying attention, and at the senior management level.”
“There are many companies who are good examples of this. We have the Work Life Award. I think we need to elevate the attention of some of these companies, celebrate and challenge other companies to follow suit. The Government, in terms of the Civil Service, certainly takes this very seriously. As a result of preparing for this, we went round checking with the various agencies. I am quite surprised that we do have a lot of measures, and the take-up rate is not bad. A lot of it also depends on individuals. The long and short of it is this. It is an important area. We do not believe that it is something you can force and legislate, but it does need everyone to play a part. Individuals must choose. We need to bring it up as part of our conversation a lot more. Individuals will begin to reflect about what they really want and what they really desire and make those choices. When they want to make those choices, are those choices available? That is why some of these schemes are there and that is where a promotional role is something that we ought to be looking at at this stage. Would I rule out legislation? No. I think we should leave everything on the table. These are all tools, in terms of solving a problem. Right now, we think that a number of these measures, a number of these steps, are in the right direction. We should wholeheartedly support them and go along those lines. And as we go along, let us pick up ideas and let us see how to reinforce them. I hope that this is something that can succeed. We are always looking at rankings but I do not think that is one ranking in terms of number of hours worked a week that we should be right at the top.”
“I thank the Member for her various clarifications. It revolves around a central theme. I am a very big supporter and I do believe that it is important to focus on our family, to focus on the ability of all of us to balance our various work-life priorities. Individuals have different requirements. It is very hard to mandate and expect every single one to follow a particular guideline. We are at different stages of our life. We have different priorities. Some of us are married, some of us are singles, some of us may have children and families and are driven, but we have different priorities in life. What we want to be able to do is to provide a range of options where people can choose. Can you legislate that? There are things that we can do, which is why WorkPro is put in place, largely to bring in the various schemes to make it easier for implementation and to strengthen it. You can incentivise. Even in the whole process of incentivising companies, it is something that we can work on to raise awareness and for more companies to embrace it. And we can put in Page: 162 place measures, practices and so on. But culture – that is really the heart of it. How do you bring about culture? Can you legislate? If you have legislation, will it mean that suddenly the mindset will change? I am not sure whether it does that, which is why legislation is not something that we are looking at at the moment. We have been looking at this issue for some time. We have a tripartite committee on this. It is important for this tripartite committee to stand up. I do intend for it to take a much more active role, bring in champions in the industry, people in society who feel strongly about it and see how we, on a promotional basis, celebrate this.”
“And this has to be earned, not just by what we say, but by what we do on all fronts. This Budget is just one step amongst many towards building a Better Singapore for all Singaporeans. Page: 161”
“Given the very strong commitment by our tripartite partners, I am convinced and confident that we will be able to reinforce the relationship and the foundation that we have built up over the years. By doing so, I think we will equip ourselves to handle the new challenges that invariably will happen in our changing landscape and workplace norms. This is where it is important to highlight that companies do play a very important part. It is not just about unions, not just about workers. Employers play a critical role in this. In conclusion, my Ministry, along with the whole of Government, is committed to making things better for all Singaporeans. On our part, we will do what we can to create better jobs, better wages and opportunities for our people. This allows us to have a stable base upon which individuals can reach out and meet their various aspirations. We also aim to develop better workplaces where people can find work-life meaningful. Can we and our children look to the future with hope? Will our policies be able to touch the lives of our people meaningfully? Would we still be proud to call Singapore home? I believe so. It can only happen if we all walk this journey together – the Government, our people, businesses. We cannot, only when there are issues and concerns, turn to and expect the Government to give better hand-outs, better incentives, better regulations. We all have a part to play. No solution can just come from the Government alone. As Members can see, many of these solutions require a mindset shift, a new mandate and mindset shift. Can we legislate for that? Sometimes, it would be counter-productive. This is where it is important for us to build up mutual trust and respect.”
“For some of them, we are not able to proceed because it is a dispute between employer and employee, which is why we are exploring whether to establish another set-up to deal with these non-statutory violations. The first avenue in resolving these disputes must surely come from within the companies, rather than running straightaway to regulations and law. While legal strikes are a legitimate course of action for unions to negotiate for pay and other benefits, I think we must continue to make sure that that is a last resort, and that there are adequate avenues for consultation, negotiation and dispute conciliation so workers need not resort only to industrial action. Also, we need to ensure that our unions remain relevant. Asst Prof Tan suggested that the Government consider requiring companies to pay the unions subscriptions, especially for their foreign employees. Union membership should be driven by unions who would then be motivated to offer attractive services to their members to stay relevant. We understand that there are companies, for example, Resorts World Sentosa, that do pay for union membership on behalf of all their rank-and-file members as fringe benefits. Unions can negotiate for this for their workers. In Page: 160 the wake of the SMRT strike, the National Transport Workers' Union has been reaching out to SMRT employees. I understand that it has been successful in recruiting more union members, many of whom are foreign workers. I also understand that NTUC has set itself the ambitious goal of being one-million strong by 2015, and is actively innovating to reach out to more workers, including by setting up social enterprises that provide a wide range of benefits to union members.”
“Strong tripartite cooperation has always been a hallmark of Singapore. It is something that I have come to realise. I did not need to pay much attention to it previously. It is something quite unique and, increasingly, many countries view this quite positively. They find it fascinating that we are able to establish something like that. It is something that Page: 159 we should not take for granted and we should strengthen it. It has contributed to general industrial harmony, stable jobs for our workers and, in turn, our attractiveness as a business and investment location, which ultimately benefits Singaporeans. Asst Prof Eugene Tan is right when he pointed out that the SMRT strike in December last year is a reminder that we cannot take tripartism for granted. Asst Prof Tan asked whether legalisation could be introduced to enable sanctions against any employer who treats his employees poorly. The Employment Act already stipulates basic employment standards. The Government's role is to ensure that these basic employment standards are upheld. We will all agree that it is difficult and it is perhaps not even possible or desirable that we use regulations and the law to prescribe management practices. I fully recognise, as I mentioned in this House earlier today, that we have talked about enlightened management, positive management, how you engage, how do you have good communications with your staff, do we mandate that? Do we legislate that? Companies need to level up and understand that it is a fundamental requirement of building any great organisation. Disputes occur fairly frequently. We have seen the cases.”
“I think low-wage Singaporeans in particular, and perhaps Singaporeans with lower education, may not be familiar with their rights and it is important for their rights to be respected and enforced. 6.15 pm Mr Yeo Guat Kwang suggested better protection of our foreign workers. I would like to stress that the Employment Act is nationality-blind. The enhancements to the Employment Act apply both to local and foreign workers. As Members are aware, we also made changes to the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA) last year. We will be doing more to protect workers in Phase 2 of both the Employment Act and the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA) reviews, with a view to achieve an equitable balance of rights and responsibilities between employers and workers. Mr Zainal Sapari asked what the Ministry can do to make it easier for workers to make claims for non-payment of salaries. We will be reviewing penalties for salary non-payment as part of the Employment Act review to send a clear signal that employers must not fail to pay their workers' salaries in the first place. I fully share Mr Zainal Sapari's concern for some of these workers. Any delay has a major impact on the quality of life of these Singaporeans. Our plans to make it mandatory for employers to provide pay-slips, as suggested by Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, will help in facilitating the resolution of such salary disputes. I would like to re-assure everyone again that MOM is committed to improving our processes, including through our EFMA and Employment Act reviews, to ensure that the employment rights of all our workers are protected. Lastly, I would like to emphasise on the importance of continued strong tripartite cooperation in our current landscape.”
“The review is underway and, when ready, we will announce the outcome of it. Ms Lee Li Lian asked that members be allowed to use their Retirement Account (RA) savings to pay outstanding housing loans. Today, members can already use the part of their RA which is above half of the Minimum Sum for housing. On a case-by-case basis, we have granted concessions for needy elderly members to tap on even more RA savings for their housing needs. Ms Lee mentioned a particular case. We have checked. With regard to that particular member, we actually have not rejected him. We are in the process of asking the individual to provide us more information to evaluate whether his case warrants merit. Madam, I will now briefly address other concerns raised by Members on better protection for our workers, an issue which I had covered earlier in my first speech. Mr Seng Han Thong asked about better protection for our self-employed Singaporeans. Indeed, this is something that we are concerned about and we will address it in Phase 2 of the Employment Act review because, as Page: 158 mentioned, it is a complex landscape. We recognise, however, that there may be workers who are engaged as freelancers or self-employed persons when the relationship is really one of employer-employee. As a result, these workers do not enjoy protection as an employee under our labour laws. So, it is important for us to look at this under Phase 2 of the Employment Act review. We will continue to raise awareness of compliance with the Employment Act and CPF Act under the WorkRight campaign to ensure that the employment rights for such workers are protected. And I do ask Members of this House to support that campaign because, as a result of greater awareness, we have found that people are stepping forward.”
“Indeed, having an understanding of this difference is important. We are always captured by the headline numbers for inflation but, actually, core inflation is a useful reference point. I would suggest, not just for the elderly but actually for a number of Singaporeans, the core inflation is really the figure that matters. When we were considering how to moderate the Minimum Sum increase last year, we explored using core inflation to adjust the Minimum Sum instead. We actually studied the historical trends and found that headline inflation and core inflation rates did not differ significantly for much of the past decade. In fact, in some years, core inflation was higher than headline inflation. This is why we decided to stick to using headline inflation, but to moderate the increase in the Minimum Sum by spreading out the remaining real Minimum Sum increases to reach the target Minimum Sum in 2015 instead of 2013. Several Members touched on various rules concerning the use of CPF for housing. Mr Low Thia Khiang has asked for a review of the Valuation Limit (VL) policy. The VL aims to prevent excessive use of CPF savings for housing. As Mr Low has described, members who reach the VL may face difficulties in financing their homes. In fact, I have faced the same situation myself – not for myself, but from my residents who come to see me. Mr Yee Jenn Jong and Mr Gan Thiam Poh raised this in Parliament last year. Several other Members, including Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Masagos Zulkifli, had also approached MOM directly to ask for a review. Therefore, we have started a review of the VL policy. Meanwhile, on a case-by-case basis, we have allowed members some flexibility to use CPF beyond the VL where the case merits.”
“About 83,000 older members have already joined CPF LIFE since the scheme was made available to them on an opt-in basis in 2009. This is already equivalent to and possibly more than the total number of private annuities in force today. The numbers are not bad, but we do need to reach out, as expressed by Mr Seng. Through various channels, we will continue our efforts to raise awareness among older members and their children that CPF LIFE is an option they may wish to consider. Mr Seng also asked what more could be done to help self-employed persons (SEPs) save up for their own healthcare and retirement needs. The enhancements to the WIS, announced at Budget 2013, benefit self-employed persons, too. The maximum WIS payouts for low-income SEPs will be increased by 25% to 50%, just like for employees. We will also be giving 10% of WIS payout to SEPs in cash instead of paying it entirely into their Medisave accounts. The larger WIS quantum, together with the increase in Medisave contribution rates for low-income SEPs, will give SEPs more cash-in-hand for their daily expenses while boosting their long-term healthcare adequacy. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked whether we could adjust the Minimum Sum yearly by a more reasonable rate that is not only based on the CPI. It is important that the Minimum Sum preserves its value so that basic retirement needs for each successive cohort can be met and will not be eroded with inflation. Hence, we will not be able to completely delink the Minimum Sum increases from inflation. Mr Low suggests excluding imputed rental and private road transportation from the inflation measures used – in other words, just focus on core inflation Page: 157 which, as he shared, does not affect the elderly as much.”
“Providing companies with an interim buffer so that they can better manage rising wage costs over this period of economic restructuring would also allow them to free up resources to invest in and to focus on improving productivity rather than half the time worrying about managing their bottom lines. I think having this assistance in managing cost would help companies because they will feel the pressure to raise wages. It is only with productivity improvements that companies will be able to continue paying higher wages in the long run. Mr Heng also suggested that the National Wages Council include in this year's guidelines a reminder to companies to take the Wage Credit Scheme into account when contemplating wage increases. In the coming months, the Government will be working closely with the unions and employer groups to ensure that the scheme is well-understood. We hope that in doing so, more firms will be able to benefit from the significant level of support provided by the Page: 156 scheme. Now, let me turn to addressing some of the questions raised on the CPF. Mr Seng Han Thong has asked for an update on CPF LIFE. We expect about 34,000 members, or slightly more than half of those turning 55 this year, to be automatically included into CPF LIFE. It is a little early to tell whether members prefer the Standard or Basic Plan, as they are given six months to choose their plan. It is similarly too early to work out what their actual payout levels will be. But we know that the median Retirement Account balance for active members turning 55 in 2013 is projected to be about $90,000. This would correspond to a payout of about $800 for a male member on the Standard plan, or a $700 payout for females. Mr Seng also asked how we are reaching out to older members.”
“This social compact should be developed and should be strengthened going forward. As we refine our approach, we must bear in mind that there is no foolproof way to eliminate bias. We will require a combination of different measures, including making our existing Work Pass framework more robust and relying on whistleblowers within companies to obtain evidence and report discriminatory employment practices. Above all, we must set clear social norms and take a systems-approach to ensure that Singaporeans are given a fair consideration at our workplaces. I am moving on to some of other cuts. Mr Christopher de Souza and Mr Teo Siong Seng asked how the Wage Credit Scheme, announced by the Deputy Prime Minister in his Budget Statement, ties in with our productivity schemes to move Singaporeans into better jobs and better wages. Mr Heng Chee How also raised the issue of whether the Wage Credit Scheme would really raise the wages of workers beyond what the companies would have offered in the first place. My sense is this. Actually many businesses, including SMEs, will, in all likelihood, have to raise wages, given the tight labour market we are in. Demand is very strong; supply is tight. Productivity, however, may not go up as quickly – and I think we acknowledge that. It will take some time, and it may not go up as quickly as the pressures to increase wages. In such situations, we do not want companies to hold wage increases back, or to pass on wage increases to consumers simply by increasing prices. So, the Wage Credit Scheme was designed and intended to help businesses avoid doing either.”
“As I mentioned earlier, the EP framework was restructured to raise and incorporate a tiered series of qualifying salary thresholds. What we are going to do is to also transit and establish this same structure for the S Pass. Given the larger proportion of Singaporeans who will enter the workforce as PMEs in the near future, we will make adjustments, as I mentioned earlier, to the EP framework, particularly the Q1 sector. So, the intent is to level the playing field for our juniors to mid-level PMEs. Our adjustments at the S Pass framework level, in particular, will help our Polytechnic graduates. We will not pursue an approach that requires companies to choose a Singaporean regardless of merit. What we do need is to ensure that companies are fair in assessing all potential candidates for jobs, and both to deter and punish any form of discriminatory or biased decision-making on the part of individuals. This is only fair because we provide a safe pro-business environment and companies must surely provide a level playing field for all prospective recruits and employees. The companies here, both local and foreign, have an important role to play in an environment where we nurture Singaporeans' capabilities and to enable their professional growth. We are investing heavily in education and continual training. So, tap on this. It is our competitive advantage. As an example, MTI and MOE launched the Singapore Industry Scholarship, partnered with companies with strong HR practices and who believe in growing their talent. Enlightened CEOs must aim to grow the Singaporeans in their firms. The Government has a responsibility to Singaporeans, and businesses have a responsibility to the community they are located in. This, in some sense, Page: 155 is a virtuous cycle of trust.”
“I do not know why she only talked about e2i because we also have CaliberLink. Could we consider, perhaps, having employers examine CaliberLink, e2i's pool of PMEs and unemployed Singaporeans looking for jobs? In fact, we are helping companies doing the matching. We are doing that with SMEs as well. Can we enhance that before Employment Passes are awarded? Or, in fact, earlier, we talked about the Individual Learning Portfolio, where Dr Amy Khor talked about how we are planning to develop this – how you put in your database, how you put in your skills. And because it is all IT-based, you can actually weave it into a system where that actually also becomes part of that landscape. So, I think Page: 154 there are exciting possibilities. I do not think it will necessarily solve everything, which is why it is one part of a larger solution set. MOM will consult closely with stakeholders in the coming months to further explore and develop a practical framework that best meets our circumstances and needs. The third issue is about more Singaporean PMEs joining the workforce. This is where we are concerned about people coming in and then substituting Singaporeans because they are lower cost professionals, they could work longer hours, and their main purpose really is to earn an income, remit it back home and eventually go back. MOM will adjust the eligibility criteria at the Employment Pass level, and we will continually review this as more Singaporeans become tertiary graduates and we have more PMEs entering the workforce. As we have highlighted, the profile is shifting. Come 2030 or so, we will eventually have two-thirds of our workforce who are PMEs. Correspondingly, we also need to manage our EP numbers. The EP numbers have dropped since we restructured.”
“Our preliminary research in the case of implementing such measures effectively while still providing for employers' genuine need for talent, is actually not so straightforward. I just cite two examples. Hong Kong has a General Employment Policy (GEP) which allows local employers to recruit foreign professionals not readily available in Hong Kong to meet their manpower needs, subject to a set of criteria. But when you look at the data and applications, actually most of the applications put up by employers all ended up being approved anyway. In the US, while they do have requirements to ensure US citizens are recruited first before foreigners, they also take a balanced approach. For the H1B visa, which is meant for foreign professionals, this requirement does not apply to every employer. Instead, it applies only to higher risk employers who hire many H1B workers or have submitted false applications. I think, with every system, there are pluses but there are also realities that perhaps would surface when you look at it closer. But I would say this − there is a sense that these approaches serve as useful markers, as a signal, even if they do not adequately address the underlying concerns effectively. They may also actually be complicated to design and that is why we are looking at it internally to study further to see how best to come up with a system that would make sense for us. The design of each country's Work Pass, as you can see, actually differs, and a lot of it is due to the different local circumstances. But it is something that we believe we can look at and something that we will work on in adapting a particular system that would make sense for us. I would build on an interesting idea floated by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.”
“A lot will also depend on complaints and feedback provided by the employees working in these companies. What this tells us from a management perspective is that the firms must manage their companies sensibly. A lot of it comes from sensible management, sensible engagement, explaining to people, and being conscious about what you are doing, and being conscious about what your various line managers are doing. A lot of them are not paying attention to their line managers. 6.00 pm Secondly, it is undue haste in the recruitment process. This second issue is really about taking the shortest route in the recruitment process. And we need to ensure that firms surely must give fair consideration to Singaporeans in their hiring practices. When we received the feedback about how that company went on this massive recruitment exercise, it actually sounds quite appalling but, unfortunately, this is sometimes what happens. And when we pointed it out, I hope that it registered with that particular company. Certainly, we will make sure that they have noted that. We have been studying the Work Pass framework. A number of Members here have also shared your perspectives – Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah – and have made various suggestions about how we should incorporate the best features and adapt them to our needs, like how Page: 153 employers ought to show proof that they have searched for local candidates, by requiring them to advertise job vacancies to locals, before a foreigner can be hired. All this sounds reasonable, but when we studied the systems, going behind the scene, talking to the businesses, talking to the Government officials, things are not always what they appear to be on the surface.”
“Well, sometimes, it is a matter of the management of companies being more aware and putting in place responsible HR practices. In fact, today, on various occasions, we have talked about how employers should be more responsible; we should have more enlightened HR practices. Well, for example, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman and myself have met up with the senior management of a number of financial institutions on a few occasions to stress the point that the financial industry players should make a more concerted effort to develop a local talent pipeline. These sessions actually Page: 152 have been productive and quite useful. The management, to be quite frank, have been quite honest to reflect that they need to be more mindful of the need to ensure that discriminatory hiring practices are not entrenched in their industry. Some were quite candid. They recognised that they had actually not paid enough attention to how hiring was done and that unhealthy enclaves had been formed. Others acknowledged that they would need to be conscious of diversity and clustering in their make-up. I would like to acknowledge Mr Gerald Giam for his comments. We are clearly thinking along the same lines. TAFEP and MOM have been engaging not just the HR managers but the firm's management to remind them of their obligations to attract and develop Singaporeans on merit. When complaints are lodged against firms, TAFEP engages them and ensures that all those involved in the hiring process, including the line managers, are trained in the methods of fair recruitment and selection. The response has been positive. What we will do is to step up on this front and we will take administrative measures. We will also begin to build up a profile to understand the various companies.”
“Now, let me explain how these changes will address the three categories of concern that I mentioned earlier. Firstly, the "hiring-own-kind" type of problem. Now, on this issue, we do not, and will not, tolerate this in Singapore. There are a number of "live" cases that MOM is handling presently. Let me use one of them to illustrate. A discriminatory online job advertisement was recently put up. I was tempted to mention the company but I would not. It is a very prominent company. It said it only wanted to recruit people of a certain nationality. I personally went through the advertisement a few times. I could see no reason why the company had to recruit someone of that particular nationality. This is completely unacceptable. So, we informed the company to remove their advertisement immediately, which they did. We suspended their Work Pass privileges. They remain suspended. We asked to see their senior management. In fact, a few of them flew in from overseas to meet my colleagues. We are setting out clear expectations on the part of the company to address the situation and to make amends. Their Work Pass privileges will remain suspended until we are satisfied the remedial actions will be taken. In other instances, depending on the complaint and nature of alleged discriminatory practices, of which we receive from time to time, TAFEP will investigate, TAFEP will speak to the company and, if they find that there are issues of concern, they will escalate the matter up to MOM. In the same vein, we may also suspend Work Pass privileges as we investigate, and this will include interviewing the employees to understand whether, from their perspective, discriminatory practices are taking place. We will build up a profile of the various companies. What else can we do?”
“We tier it at different levels, meaning, if you were to come in at an older age with more experience, you will not qualify for EP only at $3,000. It would have to be higher because you need to pay for an appropriate level. The intent was really to level the playing field so that more experienced foreigners do not undercut our own PMEs. We have since seen the numbers of EPs drop by about 1,600 last year. This is the first time the EP numbers have dropped since 2003. Some have been converted to the S Passes instead because a lot of them were clustering at about $3,000, But now, they will be subject to DRC ratios and levies. This formulation, I think, works and it has an impact. As you are aware, we will now apply this same tiering concept to our S Pass. Over and above that, I will make further adjustments to the EP framework, especially to the Q1 segment later this year. We are working on the details. I believe that the purpose of this is to better help our junior to mid-level PMEs. The Q1 segment, I think, needs adjustment. Now, in terms of process, we expect all employers doing business in Singapore to comply with the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices. Now, if there are issues, MOM will step in to investigate and we will not hesitate to curtail work pass privileges. At the same time, we will also explore a practical, workable process where Singaporeans are given fair opportunities in the hiring process. We will deepen the efforts with companies to develop a local pipeline for Singaporean talents. This will be a consideration as companies are brought in to Singapore. It is a combination of structural and process adjustments that we are taking as a Page: 151 systemic approach towards dealing with this issue.”
“In this respect, we know that by being open, by being competitive, we are able to generate good jobs and opportunities for our people. We remain open to free movement, both of manpower and other resources, because if we are closed off, we will be worse off. And a number of Members in this House at various occasions have highlighted this because they are concerned that if you overdo this, it can have a detrimental impact. Many Singaporeans understand that. And they are not asking for us to be closed off. They are asking for an appropriate balance, they are asking for fairness. At the same time, it is only fair and reasonable that foreign firms and foreigners working here bear a responsibility to the local communities. In a sense, this is somewhat of a social compact. We do not require global firms to give preferential treatment to locals, but they must be fair to Singaporeans. Page: 150 There must be equal opportunities for our people, whether at hiring or in advancement. There has to be a level playing field. Having articulated the thinking, how do we translate it into something that works? Now, this is a complex issue that cannot just depend on one silver bullet to solve all the problems. We will take a systems approach that will comprise structural as well as process-based adjustments. In essence, this is what we will do. In terms of structure, we will adjust our work pass framework. In fact, the changes made to the EP framework in January last year were aimed at addressing some of these concerns. What we did was to tier the qualifying salary criteria to account for experience. If Members recall, where previously it was $2,800, it was raised to $3,000. It was not just an entry level at $3,000.”
“It may, therefore, be more expedient for them to rely on recommendations from others or a ready stock of foreign candidates Page: 149 supplied by headhunters. In fact, one CEO we met told us that it was simply more convenient for him to mount an overseas recruitment exercise in a particular country to get all the skilled manpower he needs, than to invest in a detailed and time-consuming recruitment search for potential candidates within the local job market. Third, qualified foreign candidates who come in at lower level employment passes (EPs), and even at the S Pass level, compete directly with our fresh university and diploma graduates and with mid-level PMET Singaporeans. In some cases, firms may prefer the foreign candidate following a purely merit-based assessment, as he may be as qualified but perhaps willing to work for a lower wage compared to a Singaporean. Such foreign candidates could include talented graduates from developed countries looking for better opportunities in Asia. Is this meritocratic? Yes. Should we just take a hands-off laissez faire attitude when faced with this situation? There is a real impact as it can deprive our young of the opportunities they need to learn on-the-job and to progress to more senior positions later on. I do not think we can just ignore the situation. What do we do? Before you talk about solutions, let me state clearly our guiding philosophy and thinking. In everything that we do as a Government, it must benefit our people, both for the present, and for the future. What do we want to achieve? We want good jobs, wages and opportunities for our people. We want a system that is fair, and we want to be able to develop and nurture the talents and abilities of our Singaporean Core to the fullest potential.”
“First, the "hiring-own-kind", or the unfair hiring practices. We have heard anecdotes of how, in certain cases, heads of business units or HR managers have a preference for candidates they are familiar with, or of the same nationality, for reasons that are irrelevant to job performance and irrespective of whether they are more competent than other candidates. We have also heard of situations where Singaporeans were retrenched or made to resign in the name of downsizing, only to realise later that their positions were given to foreigners, who were, coincidentally, from the same countries as the business heads. Let me be quite blunt. Would these practices not sound discriminatory? Would any respectable, progressive company endorse these practices? If this is indeed because they care only about choosing familiar candidates and not about hiring the best man for the job, then I will say that such practices have no place in Singapore's workplaces. Discrimination will not, and cannot, be tolerated. Stating this principle does not mean that it is easy to implement. We all recognise that proving discrimination is sometimes difficult. It is not always possible to discern whether such hiring practices are legitimately based on the objective requirements of the job or motivated by personal connections. We all know how 关系 works. But I know that Singaporeans perceive some outcomes to be against the principles of meritocracy and fairness and I fully understand why you feel angry in the process. 5.50 pm [Deputy Speaker (Mr Seah Kian Peng) in the Chair] Second, business heads or HR managers may not be paying enough attention to local talent. In the name of efficiency, or sometimes meritocracy, some managers will want an employee in as fast as possible, whether Singaporean or foreign.”
“As a people, we are warm, open-hearted and welcoming. That is who we are. Our people also recognise that we need foreign labour at various levels. They do recognise that tapping the global pool of talent and manpower benefits us because it actually creates good jobs and opportunities for Singaporeans. It allows us to be competitive and to strengthen Singapore. But the main concern that Singaporeans have is whether we have enough safeguards for our people, meaning that even as we recognise the benefits, we understand that we have concerns about whether the safeguards are in place. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, Dr Chia Shi-Lu, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Mr Gan Thiam Poh have voiced concerns over whether our work pass framework allows Singaporeans to compete fairly with foreign professionals for good PMET jobs, particularly at the EP level. They have also made some good suggestions on how we can level the playing field further, and on how we can ensure that Singaporeans are not overlooked or, worse still, discriminated against in our own workplaces. We have Singaporeans informing us that the governments of other countries have stricter policies about hiring foreigners. We must remember that we are in Singapore actually creating more jobs than there are Singaporeans to fill them. The situation in other countries is exactly the reverse. As I highlighted Page: 148 earlier, our unemployment is fairly low, at 3%. PME unemployment is actually even lower than that. Be that as it may, to those who are unemployed, to those who are displaced, it does not matter that it is 3%, it does not matter that it is 2%. As far as the individual is concerned, it is 100%. Let me try to organise the sense of frustration that we sense out there into three categories.”
“Madam, in my opening speech, I said that developing the Singaporean Core in the workforce requires a multi-pronged approach. One important aspect of this approach is to take a firm stand against discriminatory practices. I would like to thank, firstly, many out there who have written in to me personally, to my Ministry and to many of my colleagues, to share insights, observations and many very thoughtful suggestions about how we should deal with the issue of fair employment practices. In particular, I also want to recognise the work of my colleagues, Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Liang Eng Hwa who have been actively championing these concerns and having Page: 147 long conversations with me on what the concerns are out there and what we should do about them. Today, I would like to deal squarely with the concerns that Singaporeans have on nationality discrimination and the impact of foreign labour on their jobs. Let us start from a sense-making perspective. I have been tracking this, getting feedback and also looking at possible solutions. I first spoke about nationality discrimination about a year-and-a-half ago. We started studying how other countries dealt with hiring practices. We began analysing and investigating the range of complaints that we received. We also started adjusting our Employment Pass (EP) framework – January 2012 – as a first step towards levelling the playing field. We will do more and I will explain how we will address the concerns systematically. Let me, first, describe the issue at hand. Singaporeans understand. From the many emails I have received and from the many conversations, it is quite clear that Singaporeans understand that we do need to be open to the world. Our survival, our very existence, depend on it.”
“Mdm Chair, I began by observing that from the OSC and from the various feedback we have received from Singaporeans that there are concerns. Can we provide hope and opportunities for the future? Can we ensure that our people must remain at the heart of all our policies? Can we ensure that our people can feel proud to call Singapore their home? I believe we can. It is not just the Government. This is where all of us play a part. Employers should develop more progressive workplaces through better HR practices. As I mentioned in many of our HR events and so on, it is not just the HR managers. This is a function and responsibility of leaders and the CEOs of companies. Even as we encourage dedication and good performance, we should also try to enable Singaporeans at all levels to achieve the work-life harmony they so choose. Page: 99 3.15 pm As Singaporeans, as individuals, all of us have to do our part as well. Upgrading of skills is important. We are putting aside facilities, programmes, funding support. We must take that step to move forward. I believe it is a competitive edge that we provide, and our commitment is to support the process so that Singaporeans do step forward to take up the training. I think this will be something that is useful in keeping our edge and in keeping Singaporeans employable. With all these different efforts – Government, people, businesses, working hand in hand – I think we can build a better workforce and we can nurture better workplaces, at the same time, generate better jobs and opportunities for our people and, ultimately, build a better Singapore for all Singaporeans. Promote Pro-family Employment Practices”